Letters to the editor: Mayor McLean, balanced government, rank choice voting, Greater Idaho, circuit breaker, ballot initiative, Republicans

Thank you, mayor

Thank you, Mayor McLean, for being smart and brave by keeping the mask mandate for Boise. When I’m fully vaccinated I will only feel safe supporting Boise businesses.

Shame on Central District Health for lifting the mask mandate which denies science and shouts, “Go out and infect yourself and your friends and neighbors.”

Linda Squyres, Boise

Balanced government

During my six years as county commissioner, we were continuously addressed by a Helen Chenowith aide to push back on federal control of public lands and other matters in general. We were advised that “big government” was inherently bad and “local control” was paramount. Ironically, that very aide has been serving for some time as one of District 9’s legislators, a period over which I’ve witnessed an unprecedented movement to control all matters at the state level and more specifically, the Legislature. Numerous bills this session have attempted to restrict the governor’s and attorney general’s authority and SB1110 will make the initiative process by private citizens among the most restrictive in the country. There’s a reason this alternative public access to governance was established a century ago and we should all be wary of this attempt to take it away, despite their unfounded argument to justify it. SB1110 will likely be sent to the governor for signature. I urge residents to contact Gov. Little and ask him to veto this legislation. And I would implore all in our community who believe our founders’ vision of balanced government to vote out of office any legislators who support these unprecedented power grabs.

Tony Edmondson, Weiser

Rank choice voting

Elections have left Idaho divided. This problem could be easily solved by allowing more candidates on the ballot. We need to adopt rank choice voting.

Rank choice voting lets voters cast their vote for up to five candidates, ranked in preference. Candidates need a majority (50.1%) of the vote to win. If your first choice doesn’t do well, your vote counts toward your second choice. Rank choice voting guarantees that the winner has at least 50% of the vote, so more voters will be happy with the outcome.

Many people do not feel represented by the candidates that the two-party system caters to. The traditional winner-takes-all system encourages citizens to vote against the lesser of two evils, rather than for a candidate that they actually support. With Rank choice voting, more candidates are encouraged to run for office, in turn increasing Idahoan representation. More choices on the ballot means that more candidates can run without taking votes from the two major parties. Your vote is maximized because you have more choices on the ballot.

Rank choice voting empowers voters to choose their preferred candidates without wasting their vote.

Ruby Berliner, Boise

Greater Idaho

I wonder if Oregon counties that want to join Idaho know that they will be giving up legal marijuana and will have to pay sales tax.

Dee Sizeland, Caldwell

Circuit breaker

Why do our Idaho legislators not like our seniors? This may not be true, but you couldn’t tell from how they have spent their time this legislative session. One thing they could be doing is passing legislation to double the property tax circuit breaker from $1,320 to $2,640. This hasn’t been increased since 2006, with property values rising, it’s way past due. The circuit breaker program benefits seniors, often the one thing keeping them from the worry of losing their homes.

For perspective, January’s revenue was $58 million above projected. To fund the increase for one year would cost $18 million. That means less than a third of one month’s unexpected revenue would pay for this. I believe this is a worthy cause, and if the legislators really felt it was important they would have done it already.

Protecting our seniors is a better use of legislative resources. Taking rights away from cities and counties by requiring state government approval to change the name of a street. Creating a slush fund of millions for outside lawyers and further limiting an already restrictive ballot initiative process is just bad solutions in search of problems that don’t exist.

Kevin Kelly, Lewiston

Ballot initiative

Sen. Vick claims to support limited government, but here he is taking away the power of the people. Vick claims to be fiscally conservative, but should SB1110 be approved, Idaho taxpayers will end up paying millions in legal fees just to see this overturned in courts. Vick claims to want to keep out-of-state money from buying local elections, but, with SB 1110, only initiatives with big bucks to pay signature gatherers will meet the 35-district requirement. When initiatives get on the ballot, rural votes count just as much as urban ones. The only purpose of the signature requirement is to ensure that there is at least some public support for a measure. It’s not actually a way to voice opinions. Stop the cap! SB1110 is simply an unconstitutional power grab. I urge readers to call their legislators to vote NO on SB1110.

Shiva Rajbhandari, Boise

Thank you, Republicans

I just want to express my appreciation to the Republican members of our state legislature. While the citizens of this state are dealing with the coronavirus and all the related issues that have came with that, our schools and how we could improve them with the extra money we have in the rainy day fund and other actual needs of the state. The Republicans have tackled tough issues. Trying to kneecap the governor as he tries to do his job was the start. Then throw in all the personal agenda topics. Abortion, wolf hunting, from a vehicle no less, authorizing state agencies to bypass the the state Attorney General’s office and tagging the state for the bill. The legislature’s record in spending the taxpayer’s money on useless and unconstitutional lawsuits after the Attorney General tells them that is simply laughable. Rep. Scott, that is the reason they are full-time lawyers and you are, at best, a part-time legislature.

Scott William Murray, Boise